PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs. RAJ KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The tenant, who has been ordered to be evicted in the proceedings initiated under Section 13-B of the East Punjab Rent Restriction Act, 1949 (for short, the Act), is before this court to complain that there was no valid service at all of the petition and there was no occasion for him to file even a petition for seeking for leave to defend in the manner contemplated under Section 18-A of the Act. The contention is that when a notice was served on 25.03.2011, he had been served only a copy of the petition and it was not accompanied with copies of documents purported to have been filed along with the petition. Since it was a case of a person claiming to be an NRI and was seeking for fast-tracking of proceedings for a summary ejectment, the tenant was bound to be informed of the documents which the landlord was relying on. The first date of hearing, as per the summons served, was 07.04.2011 and on the same day, the petitioner had filed a petition, contending that the note in the last page of the petition made reference to the fact that the documents were attached, but in fact, no document was attached to the petition. He was, therefore, making an application which contained a prayer to direct the landlord to supply copy of the documents relied on by her in the interest of justice. This application was presented by the counsel for the Bank. The Rent Controller passed an order on 07.04.2011 as follows:-

(2.) It would be evident that when the tenant was complaining that the documents were not being served, the landlord was prepared to rest contended by not filing a reply but reiterating that the records had already been sent and the tenant was needlessly delaying the proceedings. The court did not pass any order directing the copies of documents to be supplied but instead, it ordered ejectment, since no leave to sue has been obtained.

(3.) Section 18-A of the Act provides for a special procedure for disposal of applications filed under Section 13-A or Section 13-B. Clause (3)(a) of the said Section requires that summons shall be served on the tenant in accordance with the provisions of Order V of the First Schedule of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Clause (4) of Section 18-A provides that a tenant, on whom the service of summons has been declared to have been validly made, shall have no right to contest unless he files an affidavit stating the grounds on which he seeks to contest the application for eviction and obtains leave from the Controller as hereinafter provided, and in default of his appearance in pursuance of the summons, the statement made by the specified landlord or the NRI, as the case may be, shall be deemed to be admitted and the applicant shall be entitled to an order of eviction. Schedule-II of the Act prescribes the form of summons that will be issued where recovery of possession is sought under Section 13-B. The summons provides for a period of 15 days to apply to the court for grant of leave to contest. Admittedly, the petition for grant of leave had not been filed.